Slashdot Mirror

Some notes for y'all:

- The bill is C-60: http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/chambus/house/b ills/government/C-60/C-60_1/90191bE.html
- The blank media levy info is here: http://www.sycorp.com/levy/
- How each political party stood on this in the '04 election: http://www.cippic.ca/en/projects-cases/election-20 04/

Hm. Sounds kind of familiar.

Ironically enough, some friends of mine and I are registered with CPCC and yet we have to pay the blank media levy on media we use to produce our own music yet have never seen a cent from CPCC.

Currently, the tax applies only to CD-Rs. See Information on the Blank Media Levy

Actually, it isnt just CDR's that get this tax in Canada... its almost all storage devices. DVD, mp3 players

NOT TRUE.

They *were* considering it for flash memory and PORTABLE hard drives (no one was proposing it for hard drives in general) as well as vastly increased levies for everything else, but those got shot down as they decided that "there is no evidence that music distribution is happening via these mediums" - aka simply the fact that people are listening to their own collections of music on their own CF/micro-HDD are NOT sufficient to incur a levy - the standard is "are people putting music on it and sharing those with friends". As well there are tons of "non infringing uses" of things like CF which probably also weighed on their minds.

So there is now a levy on portable devices with non-removable storage, but it's no where near as much as the industry wanted.

Following is the *complete* list of tarrifs, taken from http://www.sycorp.com/levy/index.htm, all numbers below in Canadian currency:

21 cents per CDR/CDRW
29 cents per cassette tape over 40 minutes
portable music devices with less than 1 GB NON REMOVABLE memory - $2
portable music devices with less than 10 GB NON REMOVABLE memory - $15
portable music devices with more than 10 GB NON REMOVABLE memory - $25

EVERYTHING ELSE - NO LEVY (that includes DVD R/RWs, removable CF/HDDs, and devices that don't include built in persistent memory).

The retailers are the ones who collect and submit the levies, I don't think the manufacturers have to do anything. So there won't be lawsuits like this here - besides, no-one has as screwy laws and lawsuits as do the French :-)

I was severely pissed last week when CBC Newsworld had a so-called "discussion" regarding music downloading and its effect on the recording industry. Their only guest was a copyright lawyer who (surprise, surprise) didn't mention the levy on blank recordable media collected in Canada, which goes as a free handout to the recording industry. What other industry get's to collect free money from the government on the chance that someone somewhere might do something illegal?? As if this isn't disgusting enough, the recording industry is pushing for a levy on internet access, which will again be given to the poor music industry. I can't believe they have the balls to demand that every internet user pay even if they have never downloaded a single illegal song.

I tried in vain to call in since the issue of the blank media levy was not addressed, and I hate the idea that uneducated people out there were watching that and possibly becoming sympathetic to the music industry.

They've been trying since 1996 to place a Tariff on Canadian Internet broadcasters, only to be shot down each year. It's little known that this 'tax' is worse than the most expensive proposal from the US counter part from the RIAA and also more intrusive into listeners personal listening habits.

I've been fighting against Tarriff 22 (the tarriff aimed directly at broadcasters) for a number of years now with a lot of support from other Canadian radio stations and listeners. Our fight has seemingly not fallen on deaf ears because each year it gets shot down again. This new blanket 'tax' on ISP's falls directly in line with similar unfair blanket taxes they have implemented in the past with blank media.

SOCAN doesn't seem to realize that by charging these huge tariffs on people and ISP's enjoying music on the Internet it doesn't benefit musicians but actually prevents the incentive for people to seek out music.

But then again, music is all about profit, right?

Currently:
CD-R & CD-RW (non audio) $0.21 per CD
Minidisc / CD-R Audio $0.77 per CD/Disc
Cassette tapes (40 minutes+) $0.29 per tape
Flash Memory - Removable no levy
Flash Memory - Non Removable no levy
Micro Hard Drives (mp3 players etc) no levy
DVD-R/RW no levy

This is what he'll be paying for later.
CDR/W - $0.59 per CD ($0.93 per Gigabyte)
Minidisc / CD-R Audio - $1.23 per CD/Disc
Cassette tapes (40 minutes+) $0.60 per tape
Flash Memory - $0.80 per Megabyte
Flash Memory - Non Removable $2.1 per Megabyte
Micro Hard Drives (mp3 players etc) - $21.00 per Gigabyte
DVD-R/RW - $2.27 for each disc

Sycorp levy information

According to Wired, the Canadian Private Copying Collective, the music industry trade group, has proposed "new levies to be applied to any device that can store music, such as removable hard drives, recordable DVDs, Compact Flash memory cards and MP3 players."
The aforementioned Canadian collective has yet to distribute to its members even one tax dollar of the tens of millions it inexplicably hoards.

Well, since the industry has proposed these new levies, and they havent been implemented, it makes a fair bit of sense that nobody's recieved money from it yet.

In 2000 a levy was introduced on blank media in Canada to compensate music artists for lost royalties due to the copying of music by individuals. The levy is paid by the Manufacturers and Importers of Blank media in Canada to the CPCC (Canadian Private Copying Collective). The CPCC then distributes the monies collected (minus administration fees) to registered artists. The Copyright Board sets the rates, but does not collect them. They issued a FAQ in 1999 about the Levy.

The CPCC has proposed substantially higher rates for the levy in 2003 and asked it be applied to a larger range of media (see chart below)

Therefore (as I expected) there is already a levy in place that has yet to get money to its members, even though money has been collected for at least 2 years now. This is the lack of distribution mentioned, and the poor precedent set.

Don't kid yourself. Just because you've paid the "Celine Dion tax" on your media does not mean that you can copy music at will.

Go to Sycop's web page on this to get a better understanding on what's involved.

Frankly, I'm pissed that I have to pay a levy for something that I only use for data.

>Blank Media Prices Could Soar In Canada

Too late.

this and this might be of interest

Look at the fee for micro hard drives - $21 per gigabyte. A 20GB iPod would cost an extra $420! That's insane!

>If I remember right though, doesn't Canada charge some amount on CD-Rs no mater how they are labeled? (I seem to remember that from somewhere, probably on /.).

Yes, it's 21 cents. Most Canadians despise it, if asked, but at least we are legally allowed to go to a friends house and copy their entire library now. Not to mention the next time a pirate audio case comes up, I'm sure the "excuse" will be that the CD-R tax already paid for the music, so no dice.

The funny thing is I bought a 100-pack of CD-Rs a few months ago for $22... I really doubt the store only got $1 profit on them. :-)

I think we need a copy of Rep. Boucher around. Up here in Canada, we already have a far too restrictive levy on blank media which benefits our equivalent of the RI/MPAA, and it's kind of a pain to be paying these folks so I can put my files on CD-R to send them to my project boss... grr...

We could also use a copy of Dennis Kucinich around, although (to me) an imperfect copy that would respect the law here in Canada that keeps religious ideology off people's reproductive organs would be better.

But you can't have everything, so the least I can do is hope some people grow spines in the near future.

On the other hand, had I US citizenship (they don't, for some reason, seem to listen to foreign nationals), I would be writing to all the appropriate people. I'm nevertheless concerned, because US policy seems to be a bellweather for trends here at home.

But seriously, pirates hurt software companies just as bad, if not worse than the music industry

Hmm.. interesting point. So how long before the software industry starts asking for a fee to be imposed on all blank media purchases to offset their losses due to piracy?

I'd advise you to pick up more at that price while you still can.

To see what the levy is going to do (basically double for blank CDs and cassette tapes, and expand to include MP3 players and DVDs) you can check out this link:

http://www.sycorp.com/levy/index.htm

Fellow Canadians, head over and have a look, and sign it if you want to communicate your "strong disapproval with the levy on blank recording media."

http://www.sycorp.com/petition.htm

This petition influenced the outcome of the last blank recording media levy here in Canada. You'd do well to sign it now and get as many people as you know to sign it.

http://www.sycorp.com/levy/index.htm

For CDR/CDRW (non-audio), the 2001/2002 price is $0.21 (originally it was $0.052).

We've had two previous /. discussions that I know of. (Here and Here ). Info about the Canadian Levy can be found Here, or you can look at the Copyright Board site and get lost there.

Don't talk to me about smelling the coffee. I'm Canadian, and I know all about levies(taxes).

I sure as hell have a problem with my tax money going to fund a useless damn government administration department for the administering tax

Guess what?
This money collected does not go to the government. It is administered by, and goes straight into the pockets of, a private corporation. The Canadian Private Copying Collective[1][2] Here's the same info in French. Read the open letter (below). It explains the situation a lot better than I can. Here's the gist of it. Essentially they feel that the collection of a tax (oops, levy[4]) by a private entity is illegal. A stance that I do not disagree with.

Current levy rates (2001):
http://www.sycorp.com/levyinfo.htm
In a nutshell, CDR and CDR-W are now taxed at $.21 it was $.052 in 1999.

A very good open letter protesting the tax from the Independent Canadian Recording Media Coalition.

1. Like how they call themselves a collective. You will be assimilated. Fargin arsholes.[3]
2. The about page. Note the names and industries the founders belong to.
3. Also like the way the music and advertsing industries are on the exempt list(at bottom of page).
4. Sheila Copps[5] "This is not a tax. It's a levy".
5. Stunned bitch politician that has done more to harm Canada than any other scumbag politician.

I sure as hell have a problem with my tax money going to fund a useless damn government administration department for the administering tax

Guess what?
This money collected does not go to the government. It is administered by, and goes straight into the pockets of, a private corporation. The Canadian Private Copying Collective[1][2] Here's the same info in French. Read the open letter (below). It explains the situation a lot better than I can. Here's the gist of it. Essentially they feel that the collection of a tax (oops, levy[4]) by a private entity is illegal. A stance that I do not disagree with.

Current levy rates (2001):
http://www.sycorp.com/levyinfo.htm
In a nutshell, CDR and CDR-W are now taxed at $.21 it was $.052 in 1999.

A very good open letter protesting the tax from the Independent Canadian Recording Media Coalition.

1. Like how they call themselves a collective. You will be assimilated. Fargin arsholes.[3]
2. The about page. Note the names and industries the founders belong to.
3. Also like the way the music and advertsing industries are on the exempt list(at bottom of page).
4. Sheila Copps[5] "This is not a tax. It's a levy".
5. Stunned bitch politician that has done more to harm Canada than any other scumbag politician.

Can I now legally copy audio CDs for my friends? The simple answer is NO, but you can legally copy your friend's audio CD for YOUR OWN use. To paraphrase the introduction to the Copyright Board's ruling: On March 19, 1998, Part VIII of the Copyright Act came into force. Until then, copying any sound recording for almost any purpose infringed copyright. Part VIII legalizes one such activity: copying of sound recordings of musical works onto recording media for the private use of the person who makes the copy. It does not matter whether you own the original sound recording (on any medium), you can legally make a copy for your own private use. To emphasize this point, endnote 4 of the Copyright Board's ruling says: Section 80 does not legalize (a) copies made for the use of someone other than the person making the copy; and (b) copies of anything else than sound recordings of musical works. It does legalize making a personal copy of a recording owned by someone else.

Not only in the Netherlands. Even in Canadia, we're taxed^H^H^H^H^Hcharged a levy on blank audio(and data) media. Info here.

Sue Panasonic because they make cd-writers.. sue them again for making walkmans that can play cd-r's..

Actually, funny you should mention this, because makers of any media capable of storing music are already paying levys to various groups in control of the recording industry. See this page for more info...

It's important to remember that the Canadian government is still well on its way to imposing the asinine 50-cents-for-15-minutes tax on digital recording media.

The supposed rationale is that the tax will make up for the revenue lost by recording artists who have their works pirated. The monies collected are supposed to be distributed to those starving artists.

Unfortunately, the distribution will be based on the artists volume of media sold. The truly starving artists won't receive bugger all, while Celine Dion and Bryan Adams rake in yet more dough.

And never you mind that the tax is indiscriminate. You might never use your CDROM for music; you use it as data backup. You'll be paying the artists tax anyway, unless there's some sort of language that lets "For Data Use"-labelled CDROMs be sold taxless, while "For Music Use"-labelled ones be sold taxed.

It's a right cockup, in any case, and you can register your protest at http://www.sycorp.com/levyinfo.htm. Please do!

Sorry, I forgot that the HTML formatting wouldn't automatically add newlines for me :P

Hello all. This "levy" is plagued with two very serious problems. First off, not enough terms in Bill C-32 are sufficiently defined, so that no doubts can be cast on their meanings. This creates many problems for the correct implementation for the passed laws. For instance, the terms "digital audio" and "digital audio recording media" are defined nowhere in the Canadian Copyright Act.

What is digital audio? Is it compressed/uncompressed? What digital format(s) would qualify it as digital audio? As it has been stated many times in this forum, mp3 compression allows for a normal 74 minute CD-R to hold over 800 minutes of digital audio. If you wanted to impose a levy of 25 cents per every 15 minutes of this kind of digital audio, the total would come out to nearly $27 per CD-R. This kind of monstrosity is possible with the existing wording of this amendment to our Copyright Act.

What is a digital audio recording medium? Are we talking about CD-R's here, or hard drives, or DAT tapes, or all of the above? If this levy is to be applied to all digital audio recording media, it really should be applied to all of the above types of media. Otherwise the law bears no logical format.

Second of all, this amendment to our Copyright Act makes some automatic assumptions, with respect to the "digital audio recording media" in question:

a) All media will be used solely for the purposes of recording audio.

b) All media will contain copyrighted material, which is being infringed upon by the individual performing the recording.

c) All media will contain material copyrighted by only Canadian artists.

Those are some very dangerous and fallable assumptions to make. I don't think I even need to state that a only certain percentage of such media is used to hold any kind of digital audio recordings and that such recordings are mostly of foreign (read: non-Canadian) content. Let me play with this concept for a minute. Let's suppose that, say, a conservative 20% of all actual recorded material on the CD-R medium alone was of Canadian copyrighted material. Wouldn't an American organization like the RIAA be perfectly within their rights to demand 70-80% of the total levy imposed by the copyright collective? And this supposition of mine rests on the assumption that ALL CD-R media is used solely for recording copywritten digital audio. If you assume that roughly half of all CD-R media is used for recording copyrighted digital audio, then the collectives might have a right to collect a rough figure of 10% of their original levy. A final levy of $2.50 per CD-R, automatically becomes something closer to $0.25. That's the way I formulate this levy anyway, in my own mind. We've had tradewars with the US before and I see this as no different.

I'd like to say that as a Canadian, I would not like to see this levy hold up, mainly because it will set such a dangerous precedent. I mean, what will be next? Will a levy of 10 cents per each sheet of paper be implemented, simply because each sheet can potentially be used to infringe upon copywritten Canadian literature? Will a levy of 50 cents per each inch of any knife sold be implemented because people can potentially be stabbed with any knife and the victims must be justly compensated? Will internet subscribers, particular users of broadband services, be forced to cough up some more money because they may or may not be infringing upon Canadian copyrighted material on the internet?

Anyway, I think you all get my point. The floodgates will be opened if this levy is allowed to be implemented. Certain terms are not clearly defined and the wording appears to indicate that this levy was not well thought out to begin with. The collectives should go back to the drawing board and conceive a levy which is fair- something that Canadians will accept. This one is thoroughly ridiculous and people know it. Under the legacy of the collectives, your freedom to record material you purchased, or you created is proportional to how much money you dole out to the collectives. I don't recall the Bill of Rights, or the Charter of Rights and Freedoms mentioning anything about monetary compensation, with respect to one's personal right to do as they choose, without violating the law. The collectives just don't seem to understand that.

In closing, I'd like to say that I have discussed this situation with the EFF, EFC, two lawyers (one who specializes in copyright law), the Copyright Board of Canada and people on the internet who just view this action by the collectives, as just plain wrong. If the final negotiated tariff is unreasonable, I will do everything in my power to attempt to abrogate it. Please, if you're Canadian, sign this online petition. 23,360 people already have, which is more than proportional to the 45,000 or so Americans who expressed their dissatisfaction to the "Know Your Banker" scheme, which was abolished a number of months ago as a result. I expect nothing less here.

Hello all. This "levy" is plagued with two very serious problems. First off, not enough terms in Bill C-32 are sufficiently defined, so that no doubts can be cast on their meanings. This creates many problems for the correct implementation for the passed laws. For instance, the terms "digital audio" and "digital audio recording media" are defined nowhere in the Canadian Copyright Act. What is digital audio? Is it compressed/uncompressed? What digital format(s) would qualify it as digital audio? As it has been stated many times in this forum, mp3 compression allows for a normal 74 minute CD-R to hold over 800 minutes of digital audio. If you wanted to impose a levy of 25 cents per every 15 minutes of this kind of digital audio, the total would come out to nearly $27 per CD-R. This kind of monstrosity is possible with the existing wording of this amendment to our Copyright Act. What is a digital audio recording medium? Are we talking about CD-R's here, or hard drives, or DAT tapes, or all of the above? If this levy is to be applied to all digital audio recording media, it really should be applied to all of the above types of media. Otherwise the law bears no logical format. Second of all, this amendment to our Copyright Act makes some automatic assumptions, with respect to the "digital audio recording media" in question: a) All media will be used solely for the purposes of recording audio. b) All media will contain copyrighted material, which is being infringed upon by the individual performing the recording. c) All media will contain material copyrighted by only Canadian artists. Those are some very dangerous and fallable assumptions to make. I don't think I even need to state that a only certain percentage of such media is used to hold any kind of digital audio recordings and that such recordings are mostly of foreign (read: non-Canadian) content. Let me play with this concept for a minute. Let's suppose that, say, a conservative 20% of all actual recorded material on the CD-R medium alone was of Canadian copyrighted material. Wouldn't an American organization like the RIAA be perfectly within their rights to demand 70-80% of the total levy imposed by the copyright collective? And this supposition of mine rests on the assumption that ALL CD-R media is used solely for recording copywritten digital audio. If you assume that roughly half of all CD-R media is used for recording copyrighted digital audio, then the collectives might have a right to collect a rough figure of 10% of their original levy. A final levy of $2.50 per CD-R, automatically becomes something closer to $0.25. That's the way I formulate this levy anyway, in my own mind. We've had tradewars with the US before and I see this as no different. I'd like to say that as a Canadian, I would not like to see this levy hold up, mainly because it will set such a dangerous precedent. I mean, what will be next? Will a levy of 10 cents per each sheet of paper be implemented, simply because each sheet can potentially be used to infringe upon copywritten Canadian literature? Will a levy of 50 cents per each inch of any knife sold be implemented because people can potentially be stabbed with any knife and the victims must be justly compensated? Will internet subscribers, particular users of broadband services, be forced to cough up some more money because they may or may not be infringing upon Canadian copyrighted material on the internet? Anyway, I think you all get my point. The floodgates will be opened if this levy is allowed to be implemented. Certain terms are not clearly defined and the wording appears to indicate that this levy was not well thought out to begin with. The collectives should go back to the drawing board and conceive a levy which is fair- something that Canadians will accept. This one is thoroughly ridiculous and people know it. Under the legacy of the collectives, your freedom to record material you purchased, or you created is proportional to how much money you dole out to the collectives. I don't recall the Bill of Rights, or the Charter of Rights and Freedoms mentioning anything about monetary compensation, with respect to one's personal right to do as they choose, without violating the law. The collectives just don't seem to understand that. In closing, I'd like to say that I have discussed this situation with the EFF, EFC, two lawyers (one who specializes in copyright law), the Copyright Board of Canada and people on the internet who just view this action by the collectives, as just plain wrong. If the final negotiated tariff is unreasonable, I will do everything in my power to attempt to abrogate it. Please, if you're Canadian, sign this online petition. 23,360 people already have, which is more than proportional to the 45,000 or so Americans who expressed their dissatisfaction to the "Know Your Banker" scheme, which was abolished a number of months ago as a result. I expect nothing less here.